40. The representative of Uruguay said that the obligation laid down in Article 65.5, in his delegation's view, did not include a specific obligation to notify. This obligation will be met within the general context of the notifications under Article 63. A procedure for the notification of modifications of laws would seem to imply a presumption of bad faith on the part of a Member modifying its legislation. His delegation was of the view that one should start from the opposite end and assume that Members would comply with Article 65.5 because of the obligation contained in it. If there were to be a violation of the provision, Article 63.3 would be available for other Members to draw attention to the alleged non-compliance. As a general comment, he also wished to point out that, in case of difficulties arising out of a difference in the legal interpretation of a provision, a consensus should be sought. Legal objections to a certain interpretation might be well-founded and should not be overlooked in an attempt to come to a procedural solution.
